Skip to main content

About your Search

20120501
20120531
STATION
CSPAN3 36
CSPAN2 20
CSPAN 16
MSNBC 8
MSNBCW 8
KQED (PBS) 6
WMPT (PBS) 6
CNNW 5
WHUT (Howard University Television) 5
CNN 4
SFGTV 4
WETA 4
KQEH (PBS) 3
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 168
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 168 (some duplicates have been removed)
to that effect. was that a view communicated to you personally? >> no. >> we know mr. murdoch told the house of lords communication committee back in 2007 when he was spoken to, i think in new york, that he was a traditional proprietor, he exercises editorial control on major issues about which parties to back on policies in europe. do you agree with that or not? >> yes. >> did this apply as much to the "news of the world" as "the sun" or did that only apply to "the sun"? >> i think mr. murdoch is probably more interested in "the sun" in terms of political issues, but it also applies to "news of the world" as well when i was there. >> now, your evidence, same committee, question 1461, i think it would be fair to say that before any appointment, he knew you pretty well. you stand by that? >> well, particularly before my appointment as editor of "the sun." >> yes, 2003. >> aware of my views, both social views, cultural views, and political views. do you stand by that or not? when you said take euro, for example, mr. murdoch was absolute al wear of my views on europe. i think even before i beca
of the relationship that actually runs through the whole thing, isn't it? >> yeah, yeah. >> given that mr. murdoch was not quite in the same place politically as new labor, did not a very factor trying to obtain his support entail to making compromises by new labor? >> i don't think so because i don't think as it were, we went out to him and said rupert would really like you to back this. and i say in my statement, far more important. and this isn't just about murdoch. because murdoch is the biggest figure and because the phone hacking has led to this inquiry. there's been a huge amount of focus on him. this goes right across the media panoply. we had strategies for all of these papers. and we had approaches out to all of these. but i certainly think with mr. murdoch, for example, you asked me in the questions in advance about the visit to the cayman island. it gave us an opportunity to, in a sense, use that event as a broader public platform and it gave us an opportunity to set out for a huge number of editors and execute ifr ives from aroun world what new labor was about. i think it would have b
that to you personally? >> no. >> mr. murdoch. we know he told the house of lords communications committee back in 2007 when he was spoken to in new york that he was a traditional proprietor who exercise editorial control on major issues. you agree with that or not? >> yes. >> doesn't apply as much to the "news of the world" as th"the sun.:" >> i think mr. murdoch is probably more interested in "the sun" and terms of political issues but it also apply "news of the world." >> your evidence -- question 146, i think it would be said that before any appointment, he knew me pretty well. you stand by that? >> before my appointment to the sun." of "the >> he would be aware of my views, social, political and cultural. do you stand by that? then you said take europe, for example. i think he was aware of my views. >> yes. >> without delving into this with great detail, your views on europe -- you were skeptic? and politically your position is very similar to mr. murdoch's? >> in some areas. >> in which areas to they differ? next we disagreed about quite a few things. more in margins of it rather tha
. murdoch, you seem to know where mr. chairman stood on issues that would directly affect your company and your company's? >> not, not really. i mean, i wouldn't really have raised specific things with him about that. other than consistent, you know, my position on policy and things like that have been pretty consistent and pretty public. >> about regulation, whether it is tv regulation, ofcom press regulation, competition plurality. would you want to know about that? >> i think more generally one would like more generally an approach to enterprise, an approach, not so much macroeconomic but an approach to business and how businesses work and how they create jobs and the like. >> so why wouldn't you want to know his views about those matters? >> of me, the purpose of these meetings were not desert to find a. from foreign policy to other things spent i'm sure you wish to range over a number of topics, but to the commercialization of the company and some would say your duty to find out where mr. chairman stood, wouldn't? >> on the sure whether leader of opposition stance on issue is comm
back us in 1997 i'd pro probably said no. >> did you regard having to deal with mr. murdoch and his press as a necessary evil? >> well, i think it was part of the job. i think was part of my job to help tony blair communicate to the public, and part of that was through the media. rupert murdoch there's no point denying is the single most important media figure. and it would have been foolish on our part not to have sought to build some sort of relationship with him. >> did you regard having to deal with him as a necessary evil? >> well, i don't like the word evil in relation to anyone. but i saw it as a part of my job and a part of what we sought to do. again, as is often clear from my diaries, there was often when i didn't particularly like having to do it. and with tony blair i think there are times when i say including just before the elaboration, i included this in my witness statement where the sun asked for a piece about europe and we talked about whether to do it and we didn't change policy but we knew what they wanted rhetoricwise. i did feel a little bit uneasy at times. bu
. the parliamentary select committee found that mr. murdoch's company misled parliament about the scale of phone hacking at one of his newspapers. the finding was less than unanimous. news corp. has shot back a statement, calling some of the committee's language unjustified and highly partisan. our business editor has more. >> rupert murdoch, until recently, seen as the world's most powerful media mogul. today, he was declared not a fit person to run an international business. he and his colleagues turned a blind guy for years to phone hacking by a journalist at the "news of the world." >> everybody in the world knows who is responsible for the wrongdoing. rupert murdoch. more than any individual life, he is to blame. morley, the dates are his. he paid the piper -- morally, the deeds are his. >> the former editor, the legal affairs manager for mr. murdoch's british newspaper, and mr. murdoch's right-hand man. all the accused of misleading mps, by telling them that hacking was limited to one reporter. today, in york, where he is still an editor for another organization. they have all rejected the
or concern, is that it? >> no. >> why not? >> because although mr. brown had said those things to mr. murdoch, and although i had heard similar insinuations from others close to mr. brown that there was this tone of threat about it. the fact is that it didn't occur to me that they were real or proper or, i just, i just dismissed them, i suppose. >> some would say an elected government has executive power, or through parliament, would be quite entitled to bring in media policies which thought to be in the public interest but nonetheless did impact on the commercial interests of the media companies. would you agree? >> well, i'm sure that it is absolute, of course it's possible governments to debate regulation and policy on the media. of course, i agree with that. >> i'm just trying to explore your thinking in 2010. you have here mr. brown allegedly on your evidence hostile to news international. and you have mr. cameron, who is -- is that correct, he is favorable to news international? >> he wasn't hostile to "the sun." >> just have this would wait in your thinking. you are the chief executive
. however, mr. murdoch owens reaction to the headline quote the biggest politicking of my life, speaks volumes, and politicians still believe that newspapers are capable of making a difference. if they did not, why else would they go to such lessons? either his insights are such that anyone would want to hear them for no other reason, or it is envisioned he can deliver something which politicians want your mr. murdoch denied the charge that there were any expressed deals. his account when he's giving evidence in april suggested it was all a matter for the politicians, many of whom he criticized. because as many times that politicians want to support which is understandable, that he asks for no favors in return and received none. it is for you to decide on the evidence you have already heard and we will hear, whether any explicit request for favors was either made or offered. but the modus operandi sophisticated people is likely to be far more subtle. it is implausible that mr. murdoch would have asked baroness thatcher for expressed favors at that lunch at checkers on for the january,
elaborate on what you mean halfway down where you say mr. murdoch has played a power game with political leaders. >> yes. the political leanings of most newspapers in britain are predictable. so the paragraph is going to supporting the conservative party, "the daily mirror" is going to be supporting the labor party. from recollection i think there's only two newspapers that are predictable. one is "the guardian," and the other is three of the four "news international" papers. "the guardian" normally supports the labor party but in any election, they support the liberal democrats. it did that in 1983 and again in 2010. so it's sort of fair-weather friend. it won't support the conservatives. certainly -- it's unpredictable about whether it would support the labor party. for the murdoch papers, since mr. murdoch purchased those papers, "the daily times" has always supported conservatives and did so in 19 7. the other bit what i perceive of mr. murdoch's approach particularly with "the sun" and "the news of the world" was that he reckoned that his political influence would be greater if as i
say mr. murdoch has played a power game with political leaders. >> yes. the political leanings of most newspapers in brat tan are predictable. so the paragraph is going to support the conservative party, the daily mirror is going to be supporting. from recollection i think there's only two newspapers that are you been predict. one is the guardian and the other three of the four at news international papers. the guardian normally supports the labor party expect in elections when it needs them to support us, it supports the liberal democrats. it did that in 1983 and again in 2010. so it's sort of fair weather friend. it won't support the conservatives. it's unpredictable. and for the murdoch papers since mr. murdoch purchased those papers. the sunday times has always supported conservatives and did in 1997. the other bit what i perceive of mr. murdoch's approach particularly with the sun and the news of the world was that he reckoned that his political influence would be greater if as it were his support was available in return for what he thought he could get out of it. i don't mean a d
. >> going back to mr. murdoch, the three telephone calls before the start of the iraq war in 2003, something that i think you can give very clear evidence about, the fact that they probably occurred or did occur but the substance of the calls, you can't assist us with. is that the same? >> well, can i only give you evidence as far as it relates to what i wrote in my diary. i don't actually remember the calls but i did write in -- on march 11, 2003 about one of the calls. >> it does appear that it was a call that tony blair had made. whether that helps you or not, i don't know. >> let's don't use the phrase implied express deal, let me use none of those words. let me understand what's going on here. the government was more than just contemplating heading for a war. mm-hmm. >> it was obviously understandable if they wanted to discover what the reaction from those who were responsible for our media was going to be. and i could equally understand why a prime minister might think it of value to seek to get across in an unvarnished way, unmediated by other press comment, what was really going on i
and affairs manager of the british newspaper and for decades mr. murdoch's right hand man. all accused of saying hacking was limited to the work of a single row reporter. all are facing the possibility that the whole house of commons may find them guilty of contempt. today in new york, he is still an editor for another organization. he in the two others have all rejected the damning verdict. it was a disclosure last year that the news of the world hacked the fun of a murdered teenager -- phone of a murder teenager that turned the story into one of national importance. the concern the people's privacy has been invaded by phone hacking has grown and grown. >> we used to not ever criticized murdoch or the press. to see this report has come as a bit of a shock. i thought, is it too much? has it gone too far? and then i thought, no, it has not. i think rupert murdoch has a lot of questions to answer. he has a lot to answer for and i think he is for the first time being held to account. >> what will be the impact of the verdict that rupert murdoch is not fit to run an international company?
? mr. anderson, we heard what mr. james murdoch explain who he is. can you remind me? >> fred michel is public affairs for news corp europe and asia, and matthew anderson is corporate communicate should for news corp. >> the general gist of this e-mail is, the bid is still with dr. cable. this is before the 21st of december, it's necessary to keep briefings and key cabinet ministers. why do you think you were copied on this e-mail? >> i'm not sure because i wasn't copied on many of them. so i don't know. there would be regular meetings between the news corp people who were in charge of the bid, and occasionally maybe i was in that meeting. i don't know why i was copied on this particularly. >> reference to the next one, which is same file, t. r. o. p-10 thousand 16 at -- >> hang on. just before it -- sorry, which? 1679? >> yes. >> that were probably the only one you have in that file spent all three e-mails speak to i found an earlier one. the most relevant one is 1679 which you will have on tap 17. >> yes. the one that starts very good? >> that's right. it's stated the 14th of decem
>> yeah. >> we're going back now to mr. murdoch and the -- it starts, the seam of implied deals. the telephone call is about three telephone calls just before the iraq war in march of 2003. >> yeah. >> there's something i think you can be very clear what it's about, save for the fact that it probably occurred or did occur, but the substance of the calls you can't assist us with; is that fair? >> i can only give you evidence as far as what it relates to what i wrote in my diary. i don't remember the calls, but i did write on march 11, 2003 about one of the calls. i don't remember the calls themselves, but i' know i talke to tony blair about one of them and i've written about them in my diary. >> it doesn't shed very much more light upon it. >> only it does appear that it were a call that tony blair had made. whether that helps you or not, i don't know. >> let's not use the phrase implied express deal. let's not use any of those words. let me just understand what's going on here. the government was more than just contemplating, heading for a wall. it was obviously understandable i
we saw this with mr. murdoch himself. the actual piece which mr. blair wrote shortly before the 1997 election. was in march 1997. it was made clear to me by the editor that if mr. blair were to emphasize the point that there would be no entry into the euro without a specific referendum on the, that he understood people's fears about so-called european superstate. it was likely to be the final piece of the jigsaw before mr. murdoch agreed the paper would back labor. you describe that as purely a question of rhetoric. but wasn't that specifically a matter of policy or at least something which mr. blair did which he would not otherwise have perhaps wanted to do? >> no. in terms of -- the policy was already set. the policy was set. and we did have a discussion. i remember we did have a discussion about whether it was sensible to do this piece at that time. and as i say, i go on to say that it was fantastically irritating on one level. we have to go through these kind of routines. we'd be daft not to try it. i don't think we did change policy. i will admit to being a little queasy about t
set issue -- >> yep. >> -- was covered on mr. murdoch, and it was clear that mr. prody made the call at the end of the day. can i just ask you about onery ent -- one entry in your diary, page 2, number 238. >> yeah. >> you didn't fear him coming to him about me, but the relationship with murdoch, the political knives were out for you at that time as well, weren't they? >> they were. >> i'm not sure this inquiry need go into that. i'm more concerned with the underlying point. and then you say, and he -- that's mr. blair -- didn't fancy a sustained set of questions about whether murdoch lobbied him. >> yeah. >> so that's the power phrase of the conversation you had with mr. blair, is it? >> yeah. >> why did he fancy such a sustained set of questions? >> because the -- i think i've quoted in my statement, the -- what i said at the briefing on this, that the -- i said in a number 10 briefing, the conversation covered a range of issues. it had been agreed that neither side would brief on it. this had been honored. the ft should not use an official that was wrong. if asked, this did not st
colleagues. the former editor of the closed news of the world, the legal affairs manager for mr. murdoch's british newspaper, and his right-hand man. all are accused of misleading because in part they had been aware of an e-mail that hacking was more widespread than the company admitted. they said this was the work of a single reporters. they have been found guilty of misleading mp's. they have all rejected the verdict. it was a disposal last year that they have to the phones of a murdered teenager and it turned it into a story of national important. this sent them a roster of prominent people whose privacy has been invaded by phone hacking, which has grown and grown. >> they were not used to being seen to criticize mr. murdoch and the press. this has come as a shock. is it too much? has it gone too far? no, it has not. mr. murdoch has a lot of questions to answer. he is being held to account. "why did committee reached this explosive for -- >> why did this committee reach this explosive verdict? >> in the view of the majority of the committee members, rupert murdoch is not fit to run an
perceive of mr. murdoch's approach with the sun and "news of the world" was that he rec n reckoned that his political influence would be greater if as it were his support was available in return for what he thought he could get out of it. i don't mean some daily, because i've seen no evidence of a deal. he thought there was something in it. now, they might -- a benign view of this is that the people at news international took a ve very -- people at news international like other newspaper executives were very concerned about whether their readers and that they spotted between '92 and '97, their readers would support lake so she followed them. it's a more complicated set of relationships than that. i think that the per semgs i've had is mr. murdoch has enjoyed the fact he's been willing to play with political leaders in the way that the senior executives in the other papers that have not because their loyalty ultimately is predictable. i hope that explains what i meant there. >> there are three ways perhaps one can analyze the power game. one is just a piece of enjoyment that doesn't
. and then you say, and he, that's mr. blair, didn't fancy a sustained set of questions about whether murdoch lobbied him. >> yeah. >> so that's a paraphrase of the conversation you had with mr. blair, is it? >> yeah. >> why didn't he fancy such a sustained set of questions? >> because the -- i think i've quoted in my statement the -- what i said at the briefing on this. i said in a number ten briefing, the conversation with prody covered a range of issues. it had been agreed neither side would brief on it. this had been honored. the ft should not use an anonymous italian official to stand up a story that was wrong. of course, if asked, we would always say the pm spoke up for british firms. it would be real odd if he was the pm of britain and did not. this did not stand up the story and talk about the prevention in this way was simply wrong. it did lead to a considerable frenzy this one. and i think we possibly could have handled it differently. and the call from prody was not about this. was about something completely different, and prody asked for us not to brief on it. the ft then ran this
knew what the view of "the sun" was. he didn't have to talk to mr. murdoch, he could pick up a copy of "the times ". >> i think he could have picked up a copy of anything in the world. it is important to remember -- see, we're looking at this now, you're asking me to -- and people may think it's awful that i don't remember something i've written about, and i just don't. for me as well, there was so much going on at that time, but it doesn't strike me as that odd, not the least because by then, i think it's fair to say tony blair had very few strong supporters in the media left. so whether one of these calls came from him, i have no idea. whether one was actually not placing the call, i don't know. >> there's a limit to how far we can go with it, and i recognize that. but i read into what you're saying to me, that i should not read too much into the fact that there were these calls notwithstanding the pressure on the prime minister's time and all the other problems he was facing. >> yeah, because even at times like this, he would have spoken to all sorts of people. and i think it's -
mr. murdoch has been there or thereabouts for 40 years, which is a very, very long time. you make the point that he is the most powerful media owner, and then you describe mr. dacre as the most powerful newspaper editor. but doesn't that longevity give them rather more than influence? i agree, it is not the power to change the law or the way in which this country is run. but it is a very real form, at the very strongest end of influence. would that be fair? >> yeah, i think in rupert murdoch's case it would be because of the point you make. if you sort of analyze power/influence year by year over the last four decades, as you say he's been a big player throughout that time. for example, i can remember being struck once in a discussion with george bush asking what rupert murdoch was like because he never met him. which i found quite surprising. and whether he's met him since, i don't know. but that was -- i think when rupert murdoch went to the committee and said, i wish these guys would leave me alone, i think that was a little disingenuous because i think he is interested in powe
of december, 2010. it is sent from mr. michelle to mr. james murdoch. >> you obviously have the chronology. >> three minutes later, you replied to mr. mashal. - mr. michelle. the reason why you replied so quickly. you said you had dinner with mr. osborn the night before. you discussed the issues letter with mr osborne the night before a request i must have done. >> the reference to g.o. is to him personally. barbour you discussing the issue with mr. osborn at all -- why were you discussing the issue with mr. osborn at all? iraq's my memory from the dinner was that -- >> my memory from the dinner was that my husband and i and mr. osborne and his wife, it was more of a social occasion but are probably brought it up but i cannot remember. it would have been something i discussed at the dinner out of frustration perhaps at the time of what was going on. but we did discuss it at the dinner. not at any great length. >> that would not have been -- that would not have been my stance on it. i probably was not all over the complexities of an issue's letter. as chief executive of news international.
. >> mr. murdoch, at what point did you find out that criminality was endemic at news of the world? >> "endemic" is a very... a very wide-ranging word. >> tonifrontline correspondent lowell bergman goes inside the phone hacking scandal... >> they hacked my phone and they ran some pretty hideous stories about my sexuality. >> they hacked my messages between myself and the chief executive. >> ...that rocked a governmen. >> this is becoming a very, very big scandal. biggest news organization in the country are in trouble, biggest police force in trouble, and furthermore, the new prime minister's right-hand man is in trouble. >> and continues to shake the media giant. >> there is a shakespearean tragedy to what's happened. what created him now looks like it could destroy him. >> frontline is made possible by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. and by the corporation for public broadcasting. major funding is provided by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation, committed to building a more just, verdant, and peaceful world. and by reva and
>> yeah. >> we're going back now to mr. murdoch. on the theme of implied deals. the telephone calls about -- three telephone calls just before the start of the iraq war in march 2003. >> yeah. >> i think you're being very clear what it's about, the fact that they probably occurred or did occur, but the substance of the calls you can't assist us with, fair to say? >> i can only give you evidence as far as relates to what i wrote in my diary. i don't actually remember the calls but i did write on march the 11th, 2003, about one of the calls. but i don't -- i don't remember the calls themselves, but i've obviously spoken to tony blair about one of them and i've written something in my diary. >> which is the odd, not very clever comment. >> yeah. >> perhaps doesn't throw very much more light upon it. >> well, only -- it does make -- it does appear to suggest that it wasn't -- >> let's not use the phrase implied express deal. let's use none of those words. let me understand what's going on here. the government was more than just contemplate ing contemplata war. it was obviously understan
occasionally get access to. >> would you describe your relationship with mr. murdoch as being more more something different? >> i was an employee. i thoroughly enjoyed my time working for him. in the sort of interactions i had with him, he was warm and supportive. >> warm toward you, and vice versa? >> of was not particularly close to him in that regard. i would not want to overstate it. he was supportive to me as an editor. i enjoyed working in his company. >> there are rumors that you turned down the editorship of "the daily mirror" from the resignation of mr. morgan. if you did, that might reflect on your loyalty to mr. murdoch, but did you? >> there were conversations toward the possibility of me becoming the editor of "the daily mirror," and i chose not to do so. >> the 1 general election which came in your watch was the 2005 election. in the end, you decided to continue the paper path support of tony blair, but why in the end -- to continue the paper's support of tony blair, byut why "in the end"? >> there were a number of conferences. my team and i decided to support tony blair.
to impress his closeness to me to mr. murdoch, and i didn't believe it. >> it was impressed on you by mr. murdoch, and that was clear, the strong message transmitted to you, but the two predictions were right, with respect they? >> as far as predictions go, it was hopeless. >> certain events had not intruded -- she was promoted. >> sometime later, yes. >> you refer to mr. osborn, met with him in 2005 -- >> yes. >> did you get along well with him? >> along fine. we didn't spend a lot of time together, but i remember having a cup of coffee with him at that conference. >> there's a story that was in news of the world in october of 2005. >> yes. >> can we understand the context, was the sunday mirror also going to publish the same story? >> yes, i'm not sure which point i was aware they were going to publish the story. >> they did publish the same story though, yes? on the same sunday? >> yes. >> and you could anticipate that the sunday mirror's position was hostile to mr. osborn, couldn't you? >> i'm not sure that they published it, so i have not given it thought. i think it's a given that
i was born out of the fact that mr. murdoch, mr. rupert murdoch was hidden europe that summer and mr. cannon was traveling to europe and the idea came up, but it was organized through number 10. >> there must've been initiatives with the new center national to make. did you know anything about those? >> i knew he was coming, but i think the arrangements are made to mr. murdoch's office at number 10. >> were you consulted at all in those arrangements? >> no. >> you were there to increase presumably on holiday with the murdoch family and there's nothing more than not, right? >> yes, it is for elizabeth murdoch's birthday. >> and you presumably met with mr. cameron on that occasion when he was in greece, does you? >> i did, yes. >> do you recall where you save? >> i think it was an afternoon and evening. i think that's all. >> we witnessed many conversations that took place? >> yes, i was witness to one prepared by mr. murdoch in europe. very general terms. but then a subsequent other conversations when i wasn't around. >> there are a number of conversations on other topics. >> it wasn'
idea was it that mr. david cameron meet with the murdoches in greece on this indication? >> i'm not sure -- on this o'indication? >> i'm not sure who came up with this idea. i think it was born out of the fact that mr. murdoch was there in the summer and it was organized through number 10. >> there must have been initiatives there within news international to make arrangements. did you know anything about those? >> i knew he was coming, but i think the arrangements were made through mr. murdoch's office and number 10. >> rebekah brooks has denied any knowledge of phone hacking, but that's currently the subject of a separate investigation. peter biles, bbc. >> let's take a look at some of the other headlines making around the world. the aftermath of the bomb blast in syria's country, twin suicide car bombs outside a military intelligence building killed 55 people and injured hundreds more. it was the deadliest attack against bashar and fueling ideas that the militants are playing a greater role in the revolt. and escaping unharmed when a blast went on in his convoy and appealed
know, he was close to him. he was close to him. still is, i think. >> when mr. murdoch was not around and someone was talking to mr. stilt, is there a sense you were talking to mr. murdoch in some way? >> no, i wouldn't say that. i wouldn't say that. he wasn't, as it were, a spokesman. so no, i wouldn't know that. >> tell us about mrs. brooks. obviously we've seen recently -- you say in your statement that you attended i think both her weddings -- >> no, it's only the reception of the first, the wedding of the second. and just on the first one, i was, as it were, independently friendly with the husband. >> would you describe it as a friendship or a relationship born out of circumstances? >> i think it's difficult, once you're at a certain level in politics -- in fact, again, in one of these books, tony blair and i have a discussion about this -- i think it's difficult to develop friendships with people from any walk of life, where they might feel they can get something from you. i think we were friendly, very friendly, and i liked rebekah. but i think friendship overstates it. most of
a group of british lawmakers today. the committee found that mr. murdoch's company misled parliament about the scale of phone hacking. news corp. shot back at the statement, calling some of the language unjustified and highly partisan. our business editor of reports. >> rupert murdoch seen as the world's most powerful media mogul. today, declared not a fit person to run an international business. he and his colleagues turned a blind eye for years to a phone hacking by journalists at the news of the world. >> everybody in the world knows who is responsible. will part murdoch. more than any individual alive, he is to blame. morally, the deeds are his. he pay the piper. >> the committee was arguably even more damning about his colleagues. the former editor, the legal affairs manager, and his right- hand man. all accused of misleading impi'' by telling them packing was limited to the work of a single reporter. the whole house of commons may find them guilty of contempt. they have all rejected the damage verdict. it was a disclosure last year that the news of the world had the phone of a murder
very different, and you have had the "sun" which is the most powerful paper and the one that mr. murdoch has used as the agent of the power, and right out front, and then not far behind the "news of the world" and then the "sunday times" which in a sense that shares a name with the "times" is a very, very different animal from the works in a different market. and i put those three together in one bracket. and they are sort of parties and vehicles and quite separately the times and i have to say in sort of an interest because i have written for them on and off for the last 30 years, but that, the times has a very different culture from these other papers, and in my lengthy experience, maintains high standards and i just say that, because i think it is quite important that they should not all be tarred with the same brush. >> it bears the weight of its history? >> yes. and it has -- and it is very interesting that they didn't end that building and end up in the other one, but a very different culture even though they are a floor apart, and it is what you might say what their reade
primary election. we spoke with mr. murdoch earlier today on "washington journal" for about 35 minutes. >> well, now, joining us from indianapolis on "the washington journal" is richard murdoch, who knocked off 36-year senator richard luger in the indiana gop primary on tuesday. mr. murdoch, thank you for being with us. if we could, let's start with what we were talking with our audience about a little earlier this morning. and that was president obama's statement endorsing gay marriage yesterday. want to get your reaction to that. >> well, i was surprised that he made the statement, this being a political year, especially a presidential election year. because as i've traveled the state of indiana in the last 15 months i've not heard the issue come up i don't think more than twice. and clearly, in a state like indiana that is very conservative, that the president won in 2008, it will certainly work to his disadvantage here, and i see that happening in the other critical so-called swing states. states with large independent voters, i think that's going to be more of a negative than a pl
with mr. murdoch, but were personal friends after his time in august. a protester interrupted the proceedings calling the former prime minister a war criminal. he was prime minister from 1997 to 2007. >> the right honorable tony blare. -- blair. >> thank you very much indeed. [inaudible conversations] >> your full name please, mr. blair. >> [inaudible] >> you provided us with a witness statement, and i have not seen a signed copy. it doesn't matter, are you happy to confirm the truth of your inquiry? thank you very much for providing the inquiry with the assistance that you have. you comment in your statement that you have not received some papers from the cabinet office. have you yet received them, and are you satisfied that you got what you required? >> yes, i'm satisfied i got what i required now. there may be a list of meetings with various media people, and we got, i think, the fullest picture of that that we can get. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> third page please, mr. blair. working from what the up -- inquiry provided. you say in the second paragraph, inevit
have to. >> mr. murdoch has said openly that he does not believe in compromise that there is too much of it in washington. is that an attitude that might evolve if he is elected? >> there is a difference between adhering to your principles and how you believe government should work on behalf of the people. and for those of us who are more conservative, we believe it should create an environment that really stimulates positive get negative private -- stimulate private investment and entrepreneurship and small business across this country and empowers people and that is how it works best. whereas, typically democrats want more government involvement. regardless of your principals, which we all appear to our principles and that is what we should do, we still have to find the new candidate, whoever it is, whether it is indiana or whoever we have, once they are elected by the people of their state and they come here, we have got to find ways to work together. that goes for the whole spectrum, republican and democrat. whoever we elect. it is incumbent upon us to work together. we have to. >
with rupert murdoch. support new labor and we will give you commercial freedom. mr. blair told the inquiry there had never been any such understanding. >> on issues to do with the media, either express or implied. >> he was reminded in 1995, he expected rupert murdoch's invitation to travel to australia to deliver a speech attended by mr. murdoch and his senior executives. it was suggested it was a charm offensive. >> i would not have been going all the way around the world if it had not been a very deliberate and strategic decision and was going to persuade them. >> he said when he became prime minister, he decided not to confront the media. did the relationship become too cozy? >> it is not quite the way i would put it. it was a working relationship. you were dealing with powerful people. >> mr. blair said since leaving downing street, he had become friends with rupert murdoch and was godfather to one of his children. he said labor had ascribed to much power to the press barons. it also reflected on the difficulties he had with papers like the daily mail. >> with any of these big media g
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 168 (some duplicates have been removed)